Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Fall of Communism
Collapse
X
-
That has nothing to do with whether Stalin was a communist or not. Benevolent dictators have existed before, it does not change the system they are apart of. For example, there were kind and there were cruel Roman Emperors, but to say that the cruel ones (or the kind ones) were not emperors is obviously a fallacy. The same thing is true for communism. A communist leader can be kind or evil and still be a communist. Communism is an economic system (a stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable one), not a state of mind that you call "caring about the people". And besides that. you are assuming Lenin and Kruschev were decent men. Obviously neither was the butcher or madman Stalin was, but that is not setting the bar very high. I believe Gorbachev was a decent man, but I don't know if he even really believed in communism.
Comment
-
Originally posted by pinetreescanadaa huge majority of western population stereotypically connecting Stalin with Communism. This however proved not to be the case. Lenin, Khushchev,Gorbachev all proved to be great revolutionaries and leaders who care about the people.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LeaderThat would be false, but since you provided proof, I'll provide none as well.
Here's an example: He actually initiated the above ground nuclear test ban treaty at the urgining of wordwide scientists and academia. He just had a bad temper, that's why he was removed from power.
Comment
-
Originally posted by barrowajKruschev wasn't such a bad guy.
Here's an example: He actually initiated the above ground nuclear test ban treaty at the urgining of wordwide scientists and academia. He just had a bad temper, that's why he was removed from power.
Comment
-
Communism is an economic system (a stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable one), not a state of mind that you call "caring about the people".
A socialistic economy ruled by a parlimentary style or presidential style democracy can not be labeled communist.
Example would be many of the western european countries as well as Canada, though none of these economies are purely socialistic in nature.
Comment
-
Krushchev is also a brave chap.
He is the only person in the world who has banged the podium in the UN with his Russian shoe and it did not tear! :)
Red Salute, my Comrades!
I am now red in the face! :) Held my breath while saluting to get the right hue on the face!
"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."
I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.
HAKUNA MATATA
Comment
-
I believe that communism is not a purely economic system, It is a hybrid, kind of politico-economy system where the ruler is a dictator and economy is socialistic.
A socialistic economy ruled by a parlimentary style or presidential style democracy can not be labeled communist.
Example would be many of the western european countries as well as Canada, though none of these economies are purely socialistic in nature.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LeaderNote that doing some good things doesn't make you a good person. Khrushchev for example may have done good things, but I can't see those things out weighing the oppression of nearly 200 million people. He could have done something to elevate some of that oppression. He didn't.
You obviously have no idea of what you are on about, next.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ZFBoxcarCommunism is an economic system, not a state of mind that you call "caring about the people".
#1 The same thing a few others have said, it is more than an economic system. It is a way of life, politics, economics, and the rights of the citizen are all important. Equality is the main concern, what's so wrong about that (in theory)
#2Originally posted by ZFBoxcar(a stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable one)
Comment
-
I have read some of the works of Marx (not all of it because there is so much of it). And its not a work of art, Marx was more focused on the historical dialectic and proving the inevitability of the failure of capitalism, he didn't really have a plan for communism, even the Communist Manifesto is more just a vague outline mixed with yet another critique of capitalism. The planning of what a communist state (since the abolition of the nation state which Marx also backed is complete garbage) was worked out by later communists. Marx's intelligence was directed towards the past and the present. The future was thought about by people like Lenin, Mao, Castro, etc.
And by your own admission, China is not Marxist. China is booming because of foreign CAPITAL investment. Cuba was only doing okay when they received generous Soviet aid packages. Now the Cuban people can only buy anything on the black (or as I would call it, free) market, using foreign currency.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ZFBoxcarI have read some of the works of Marx (not all of it because there is so much of it). And its not a work of art, Marx was more focused on the historical dialectic and proving the inevitability of the failure of capitalism, he didn't really have a plan for communism, even the Communist Manifesto is more just a vague outline mixed with yet another critique of capitalism. The planning of what a communist state (since the abolition of the nation state which Marx also backed is complete garbage) was worked out by later communists. Marx's intelligence was directed towards the past and the present. The future was thought about by people like Lenin, Mao, Castro, etc.Originally posted by ZFBoxcarstupid, slapped togethor, and unworkableOriginally posted by ZFBoxcarcomplete garbage
Originally posted by ZFBoxcarAnd by your own admission, China is not Marxist. China is booming because of foreign CAPITAL investment. Cuba was only doing okay when they received generous Soviet aid packages. Now the Cuban people can only buy anything on the black (or as I would call it, free) market, using foreign currency.
Comment
-
If you care to go to the trouble of actually understanding the principles behind the system of Communism, you will find that the initial statement I disagreed with in my last post was outrageous, laden with personal opinion, and not accurate. Phrases like
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable
, and
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
complete garbage
do not become you, nor do they make you sound like the intelligent, educated person I am sure you are. Keep in mind the purpose of this forum.
Just because China is not Marxist doesn't mean it isn't communist. Yes, foreign capital is contributing, but so what? It is predicted that China will become the leading economy in the world, partially because of capital investment, but mostly because of distribution of wealth and the size of the population. Cuba is a different story, which I do not know much about, so I'll not pretend and speak like I do.
Comment
Comment